1. Field Of Invention
This invention relates to a flexible holding device, specifically to an improved baby bottle holder for the use in feeding a baby or storing the baby's beverages.
2. Prior Art
Many, if not most, parents or others who care for babies prefer to use a convenient, safe, simple-to-use, and effective bottle holder to feed the baby and thereby eliminate the necessity for them to attend personally to this duty. In like manner the bottle holder must conveniently satisfy the baby.
Heretofore a wide range of such bottle holders have been proposed and implemented.
One such holder, shown in patent 1,987,132 to Shine (1935), had limited use since its clamp and bottle holder could be used only over the rail of a crib. Most users will agree this is too restrictive. Users must be able to secure a baby bottle holder to a variety of other objects for it to be truly convenient. Also Shine's holder had a clamp and metal cable that lacked safety features. A baby could easily be hurt from the hard sharp edges of the clamp plate and a finger could be severely nipped by the exposed flexible cable. Also rust would eventually appear over the metal flexible cable; such rust would tend to cause injury to the baby if swallowed. Further the user had to follow complex directions just to secure the bottle to the holder. Lastly this device was shaped to simulate a mother's breast. Most women would be too self-conscious and embarrassed to be seen with a baby bottle holder that simulated a breast.
Another type of bottle holder, shown in U.S. Pat. No. 2,826,386 to Conrad (1958), comprised a clamp, flexible rod, and bottle holder. As with Shine's device, this holder had no safety features. Also the user had to pass the bottle through straps, a ring, then equalize these straps with a tension spring while trying to balance the bottle in the center of the harness. This required tedious work and was time consuming and frustrating. Users would eventually resent the labor that must be employed and thus would look for something easier. In addition, there was no easy and effective way to clean the straps when they became soiled as they are molded or cemented into the ring and harness. It was not possible to replace any part of the holder, such as a stained or worn out strap or the corrugated spring, when it eventually lost its elasticity; the user had to purchase an entire new unit. Finally the actual construction and manufacturing of such a bottle holder was complex as it used a variety of materials which required expensive tooling and parts. I.e., it made extensive use of metal machined parts, including a ferrule, threaded stud sleeves, metal screws, a metal clamp, a threaded bore, a base cup, a spring and a ring; these made the product more costly to build, especially in today's competitive market. Further, this holder needed periodic oiling and maintenance.
Likewise the bottle holder in U.S. Pat. No. 2,110,037 to De Rosa (1938) employed a similar clamp and flexible rod. As with the previous two designs, it was expensive to build. This bottle holder was the most costly among the four patents so far discussed and had product liability risks. For example, it had an exposed torsional spring that could tear off tender skin from the baby's finger and poke the baby's eye by its operating lugs. Users would find its weight too great and the holder too awkward to use, despite a built-in universal ball joint and adjustable bracket. Most engineers would agree that when a mechanical instrument uses an excessive variety of parts for such a simple purpose, it tends to break down. It will not be an easy repair if its crucially important torisional spring needed to be replaced or the universal ball joint lost its operational ability. Its adjustable bracket would eventually squeak and become an annoyance to the user and the baby.
The nursing bottle holder in U.S. Pat. No. 2,594,545 to Emens (1952) consisted of a clamp, flexible rod, and a bottle holder. The user had to insert the bottle into a bottle holder abutment, then secure the bottle by sliding spring action metal rods that were located within the pair of tubes up the length of the bottle to its nipple. The front end of the metal rods were shaped into a curved yoke which rested firmly around the nipple for holding the bottle. However this type of action would surely wear down the elasticity of the spring action metal rods and its safety device, whether it employed a thin flexible wire or a thin nylon thread. The user would find the use of this holder hampered or restrictive because of the tendency of the safety device to curl and twist itself within its coil springs. The user also had to be aware of the possibility of harm which awaited the baby should its fingers be caught between the yoke and the bottle, or if the baby inserted the metal rods into its mouth. Other forms of injury could result, such as swallowing the corrosive dust which forms when metal oxidizes.
Most users would find it desirable to have an improved bottle holder which would satisfy the important needs in providing a truly convenient, simple-to-use, durable, reliable, and, above all, absolutely safe-to-use bottle holder.